A fascinating difference in smartphone buying behaviour got highlighted today. In the US, Apple has double the market share of its nearest competitor, Samsung. However, in The Netherlands, the swamp I call home, the situation is completely reversed; Apple sits at 10% of the smartphone market, Samsung at 19.6%. Is this indicative of Europe as a whole? Could German, French, Polish, British, Spanish, Italian, etc. readers give local information from their own countries? I'm intrigued.

Rest of the planet is pretty much the same as Holland. Samsung offer products that cater to almost all the segments (new ones, not iPhones from 3 generationss ago) of the market. The difference is probably greater in Asia and South America, where the average spending power of the middle and low-income class is lower than their US/Euro counterparts.

I can't find any reliable stats about Italy, but I suspect Samsung wins by a large margin. I know many more people who own a Samsung, including myself, than people who own an iPhone.
That is also because of what gan17 says, Samsung doesn't only offer the top, like the Galaxy S2 or S3, they also offer more affordable devices.
That is the problem with Apple: whatever they do, they cater only to the wealthy.

Apple does not price iPhones aggressively in the US. It is the carriers that are dipping into their own pockets to reduce the price of the iPhone (and thus boost Apple's overall profits by roughly 10%).

Of the 4 national wireless carriers, 3 of them carry the iPhone. All three grant Apple a carrier subsidy that is roughly twice as large as that granted to any other phone. Thus, an iPhone that costs $600 sells for $200 after subsidy. An Android phone that costs $400 also sells for $200 after subsidy.

These three carriers are thus hindering sales of other handsets by eliminating their cost advantage over the iPhone. And they're also reducing their own profits by $200 per iPhone sold. But Apple has such a market-dominant position in the US that none of these carriers dares to be the first to break ranks. They can't afford to lose the iPhone.

The lone holdout of the national carriers is T-Mobile USA, whose stated position is that subsidies are unhealthy for the industry as a whole. T-Mobile has made many attempts to sell no-subsidy phones in return for a dramatically reduced monthly rate, but have had only limited success thus far.

The lone holdout of the national carriers is T-Mobile USA, whose stated position is that subsidies are unhealthy for the industry as a whole. T-Mobile has made many attempts to sell no-subsidy phones in return for a dramatically reduced monthly rate, but have had only limited success thus far.

The problem with T-Mobile is that they sell the no-subsidy phone LOCKED at a higher price than you can buy it from other retailers UNLOCKED.

Even after a phone has been discontinued, T-Mobile still tries to sell it at full release price which is usually TWICE what the market price is selling out the remaining inventory.

T-Mobile postpaid makes no real attempt to push the company's no-subsidy agenda. Since T-Mobile is in fourth place, it has no real choice but to participate in the subsidy game with the other three carriers.

You should be looking at the T-Mobile's Monthly4G phones, which are sold by its prepaid division. It's through the prepaid division that T-Mobile is offering its best-priced no-contract plans.

Pre-iphone, the carriers had all the cards and the manufacturers had little say in after sale operation. Free phones for two year contracts that the phone makers barely squeaked out a profit on razor thin profits. Android and Windows phones still don't upgrade except in rare cases. This keeps people buying phones on a regular schedule.

Apple comes along and changes the game! Samsung (phone division) would still be selling POS dumb phones for little or no profit without the advent of truly smart phones by Apple. No other phone was anywhere near the iPhone when it came out. It was in a league by itself. It was > three years before a real competitor hit the market so they obviously had not even considered it until it was too late.

Remember the $200 is also accompanied by >$1600 per contract period in monthly charges so the carriers are not hurting. The manufactures that can't adapt are going ba-bye! because they have poor managers... which most do... HTC, Nokia, RIM... Hell, Nokia and RIM will be gone in < a year. Either sold for scrap or Tango Uniform!

How quickly people are eager to paint the iPhone as the saviour of mobile.

Pre-iphone, the carriers had all the cards and the manufacturers had little say in after sale operation. Free phones for two year contracts that the phone makers barely squeaked out a profit on razor thin profits.

This is untrue, I paid for a phone with a contract in 2004, it was just under £200 with a monthly fee on top, it was a Sony Ericsson p910i.

Android and Windows phones still don't upgrade except in rare cases. This keeps people buying phones on a regular schedule.

Hyperbole. I’ve had a HTC Desire, HTC One X and a Galaxy Note all receive updates…

No other phone was anywhere near the iPhone when it came out.

That phone I mentioned above? 3 years old when that thing that didn’t support native apps came out.

RIM and Nokia are tripping over their own arses at the moment, but I’m surprised you put HTC in that bracket. Is it because they didn’t post growing profits that you assumed they will be going bye‐bye soon? They’re still more than healthy atm.

Malaysia: No statistics yet but in term seeing what people are carrying with them (I meet a lot of people daily), there's more Samsung than iPhone. The Note seemed to be extremely popular too. I carry one and I've seen quite a lot of people do to. Even Blackberries are still popular. I hardly see iPhone nowadays.

Another indication of how popular Samsung is, their Samsung stores are always swamped especially during the weekends but not so at the Apple stores.

One thing that is "Apple > Samsung" is tablets. It's iPad > Samsung/Android tablets. Still I see more and more people are carrying a Samsung tablet, specifically the 7" variation. A few used the tablet as the main phone even.

Recently in my trip in Europe I used to do a wifi scan using Fing ( https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.overlook.android.f... ) and the mac-address found were 10 times apple ones than the rest (samsung, htc,...). You can do yourself on any public network and you can see the predominance of Apple devices. People buying samsung do not even connect on Internet?

Actually in contrast to the editor of the article I see waaay more iPhones in my immediate surroundings than other phones (Samsung or HTC). And I do live in the Netherlands. Maybe it's the big cities where Apple has a larger share than the rest of the country.

France was behind the rest of the world just last year but the new carrier (free.fr) turn the market upside down. We now have the most competitive market in Europe. Carriers no longer subsidize the phones with a contract. People pay the full price of the phones and the contracts start at €2/month for 2 hours up to €19.9/month for unlimited everything. As a result, people buy cheaper phones. I see more and more dumb phones here. The mind set is that yeah we like fart apps and it's fun to play angry birds but is that worth €500? Here you can have a very good laptop for €500 and play very sophisticated games on it.

Denmark, a first mover-country in world/Europe, we usually get used as tryout-country before anyone else, because demographics shows us as a very average people, but small, avoiding big disasters when entering new products on world scene.

A recent survey (Gallup, Denmark) shows that Apple has has 37% share of smartphone market. Smartphone penetration is up to 2.1 million people from 1.2 yesteryear (we're app. 5.5 mill pop).

How can "average" be the right with (almost) anything regarding Danish population? For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_top_international_rankings_by_... (fun list overall) cites that you have the most equal income distribution and highest minimum wage (dirty socialists! ), together with highest "E-readiness" and Satisfaction with Life Index (plus, at the bottom of that page, there are tables classifying populations in numerous other ways - Denmark being near the top in most of those, quite unusual)

Back then I was the only one with an iPad. I saw some iPhones, BlackBerries and Nokias. Also a number of laptops.

This year I saw a lot of iPhones (most white) and iPads. Even kids at the pool were using iPads. I also saw some BlackBerries and sometimes something that was probably an Android. The number of laptops was way down. When I did a WiFi scan it was 90% Apple.

When kids were using a portable game console it was ALWAYS some Nintendo DS variant, never did I spot something else. Luckily I can still beat pre-teens at Mario Kart, only just.

I also noticed that the number of people using ereaders has increased. My wife and I both had an ereader with us for the first time.

The guests were mostly Dutch, German and Swedish. The local population mostly used feature phones and BlackBerries.

Samsung success is impressive. BTW I think they will fail miserably in the long run because they sell good hardware but commodity software. Android doesn't have any added value, anybody can give you Android.

I mean, if Nokia wakes up someday and launch an N9 with Android... that will be the end of Samsung Galaxy. C'mon who wants a Samsung when there's a Nokia?

Android market is a mess with zero margin in the long run like the PC hardware market is. That's why Nokia has Android only as a last desperate resort but not as an strategic option.

Apple will rule, they are way smarter capitalists than everyone else. xD

This is nonsense, at least in The Netherlands. iPhone 3GS/4/4S are just as expensive as Samsung's smartphone lineup. People regularly forget that the 3GS is *free*, and heck, even the iPhone 4 is free on contract now - with 2-year, 20-30 EUR/m contracts. Heck, the SIII is more expensive than the iPhone 4S!

Really, the pricing argument no longer holds. Samsung is beating Apple not because they're cheaper, but because people perceive them as *better*.

Now I understand why The Netherlands is plural: there are several and you live in another one than me. :-p

People pick Android phones because they are cheap, appear to be cheap or are part of some kind of offer. People want them because they can Internet with it and send Whatsapp messages. Notice how "Android" is often omitted in advertising, it's not a selling point.

iPhones are sold to the same people, but also to (a lot of) people who want an iPhone because of what it can do (which is more than surfing and sending messages). This would probably explain why iPhone users are actual users and not just owners like most Android owners are who just want a phone.

I think Android is not part of the marketing because people don't care about the operating system or the software. For a company like Apple, this should scare them to death. Android and iOS are good enough - iOS by no means has any serious advantages anymore.

This poses a serious problem for Apple, as companies like Samsung and HTC can iterate much faster than Apple can. The discrepancies between flagship iOS/Android phones is only going to increase even further - something I already predicted 2 years ago, and was laughed away for by the Apple faithful.

Normal people don't give a rat's ass about what software their phones run. They go into a store, hold up a few phones, and pick what they like, software be damned. There are people like you and I who do, but we are a minority.

It absolutely baffles me how people still beat the "Android only wins because it's cheap"-argument when the most popular Android phones are virtually always as expensive as, or often even more expensive, than iPhones. This argument is so old and clearly factually wrong I don't understand why people continue to spread it.

Samsung and ... HTC??? HTC is not doing well at all. It can't take on Samsung, let alone Apple, and it will probably probably drown in the small sea of small up-and-coming Android manufactures. It's not a good day to be HTC, RIM or Nokia.

Apple makes by far most the money. They could easily slash prizes if they should choose to, even sell at a loss (and make profit with iTunes sales). They don't, which means they probably like the situation as it is now.

They may say they create the devices they themselves want to use, but it's obviously about the Benjamins and they chose, what they think, the best way to get the most money. Cheaper phones will get them more marketshare, but the margins will be much lower and the buyers probably won't spend much in the iTunes store.

Don't forget Steve, when the iPhone was introduced, said he was aiming for 1% marketshare, which leads to believe that with 1% they'd make money.

Samsung and ... HTC??? HTC is not doing well at all. It can't take on Samsung, let alone Apple, and it will probably probably drown in the small sea of small up-and-coming Android manufactures. It's not a good day to be HTC, RIM or Nokia.

You are so right MOS6510. I also live in the Netherlands but I also don't recognize Tom's story. I see iPhone's waaay more than Samsung's. At least by a factor 2:1. And also his "people regard Samsung as quality" is also a statement that I don't recognize. I really never have heard anyone saying that!

Your linked article takes in account all Samsung smartphone sales, that includes phones way cheaper than Apple phones.

I can only speak about Italy and Spain, that's what I know very well, and iPhone 4S is a luxury phone there. Everybody wants one, but they're expensive. Samsung phones are popular, anybody can buy a Samsung.

BTW If you want to compare only higher market Samsung options, here are the prices in Italy:

iPhone 4S 16gb libero -> 600 euros
Galaxy S2 16gb libero -> 300 euros

iPhones are the most expensive phones hands down.

I live in Buenos Aires and It's exactly the same. Samsungs are immensely popular because they're cheap. Everybody wants an iPhone, but common people can't afford it.

A) GSG2's price is about 400Eur in Italy, not 300. It's also no longer the highest market device.(Unless you've been living in a cave)
B) Older devices get their prices cut, how much is SGS3? Oh yeah... Prices range from 520 to 700! While iPhone4S goes from 499 to 700. Looks like they are in the same range to me.

I hate to disagree but I really don't know anybody that says that. Samsung is definitely regarded as "inferior" as opposed to the iPhone. So it clearly has to do with the circles you're in. Mine only does iPhone. Occasionally I see something else but usually it's iPhone, iPhone, iPhone.

It shows the iOS is only progressing in US/UK, but not in the other sampled countries.

As far as the UK is concerned, currently living in London I'm not surprised. Everyone here is more concerned about money, fashion and appearances than anything else. Most people are clueless about phones, yet they all want an iPhone. For example, when I bought my Galaxy Nexus, one of my housemates asked me why, and I quote, I bought a crappy iPhone-wannabe instead of the real thing. She clearly perceived the iPhone as a status and money symbol. She's far from being the only one.

As far as the UK is concerned, currently living in London I'm not surprised. Everyone here is more concerned about money, fashion and appearances than anything else. Most people are clueless about phones, yet they all want an iPhone. For example, when I bought my Galaxy Nexus, one of my housemates asked me why, and I quote, I bought a crappy iPhone-wannabe instead of the real thing. She clearly perceived the iPhone as a status and money symbol. She's far from being the only one.

Yeah, same experience, my brother and sister live in London and without actually touching any of my Android devices they have this attitude.

I believe in Brazil (there is no official sales data) things are even better for Samsung, because of low-end devices.

In 2011, the best selling smartphone here was Galaxy 5, and this year I bet it will be Galaxy Y. The reason is that those phones are the ones the you get then joining a data plan in operator companies.

iPhone here sold very well in the start, as it was "cool", so lots of doctors (as medical, not graduation) and laywers got it just to show off (they do not even know how to use most of the smartphone capabilities). And there is some nerd niche.
After the initial boom, people who really wnated a smartphone, whent to low-end or S1/S2/S3 line.

A factor important, is that most phones are bought from operator instead of manufactor, so Samsung have an edge, as they work closely and Apple not.

Apple dominates the US market because of fortunate for them market distortions, especially high in that place.

There are hardly any owners of iPhones in the US, in the really strict sense of the word - they're almost all heavily subsidized on contracts. Meanwhile, majority of the 5+ billion mobile subscribers owns their phones upfront, uses prepaid.
(and yeah, being used to the brand is another thing - Apple has any significant presence only in quite few places around the world)

Some possible causes for Apple's dominance in America (which also explains the tilted coverage by the myopic American media).

1. US is credit based economy so people rush to buy the products with upfront 'subsidy' but attached with a contract period. It is the carrier induced 'subsidy' that makes the iPhone so much more affordable/attractive.

2. In large markets like India getting credit is not easy, so the market is driven by outright purchases (and the high price of Apple products do not offer the customers the right value for money, the perceived 'snob value' of Apple products not withstanding.)

I don't know official stats. I can only tale about my friends, what I see in the bus and what i know from people that sell this stuff.

It's all about Samsung. But there is always „but”. They are cheaper phones, like Galaxy Mini Series. You barely see SGIII. You can get Mini with very cheap contract for free, so people are taking it. If you got some spare money, and you know what the smartphone is, you take iPhone.

Tablets - iPads, iPads, iPads. If you want tablet, you buy iPad. Unless you don't know what the tablet is, don't have money, and just want to buy a present for a kid - then you buy some cheap noname ******.